Marriage is irrelevant when children are removed from the picture. You don't have to be married to be in love.
On the other hand, children had out of wedlock are exposed to not having guaranteed role models or provision.
"unatural acts"(sic) Same-Sex Behavior Seen In Nearly All Animals
Mankind is part of the animal kingdom, no matter what your specific religious belief has to say on the subject. We humans ain't special except for our capacity for advanced thought.
“And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.”
~ James Madison, letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822
I don't oppose civil unions, I would favor enacting them for all "marriages." The straight marriage is no more special or commitment driven than the homosexual marriage. Marriage is a social thing and different societies define it differently, that's why I could support enacting state recognized unions and just allowing individuals to say they are married or not married.
Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
For those who think it should be a state issue? I don't think that's right either. The effect of that concept is that if a same-sex couple is legally married in Massachusetts and subsequently moves to a state who doesn't recognize them? That state can and will deny their rights to the 'contract aspects' of marriage.
Anti-discrimination of same-sex marriages should be handled at the Federal level as a Civil Rights issue and let's just fry bigger fish.
Just because it's interesting: SSM became legal in Massachusetts in 2004. In its first year, 6,000 couples were married, 64% of them female. In the second year? 1,900 couples were married. By contrast, 36,000 heterosexual marriages is the average yearly count. Spouse - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Last edited by MaggieD; 08-07-12 at 10:04 AM.
Thank you, Quazi!